Elucidation and Decisional Risk in a Multi Criteria Decision based on a Choquet Integral Aggregation—A Cybernetic Framework

The authors are developing multi criteria Decision-Making Support Systems (DMSS) for project teams in charge of selecting a technical solution among alternatives. They propose a cybernetic framework to emphasize the link between decision-making and knowledge management processes in such projects. These DMSS's rely on the tracking of the accompanying knowledge production of long-term decisional processes by a collective with many actors. Based on knowledge production management, this paper explains how to design decisional risk evaluation, monitoring and control aids and traceability functions for strategic choices and logical argumentation. The DMSS is seen as a recommender system for the project manager. Each possible solution involved in the decision-making process is evaluated by means of a set of criteria. The evaluation results from an interpretation of the knowledge items in terms of satisfaction scores of the solutions according to the considered criteria. Aggregating these partial scores provides a ranking of all the possible solutions by order of preference. As criteria are sometimes interacting, the aggregation has to be based on adapted operators, i.e. Choquet integrals. Evaluating possible solutions by the knowledge contained in the knowledge base opens the way to automating the argumentation of the project team's decisions: the argumentation principle underlying this approach is based naturally on coupling a knowledge dynamical management system (KDMS) with the DMSS. The DMSS also evaluates the decisional risk that reflects the eventuality of a wrong selection due to the insufficiency of available knowledge at a given time in order to adopt a reliable solution. Decisional risk assessment corresponds to sensitivity analyses. These analyses are then exploited to control the decisional risk in time: they enable to identify the crucial information points for which additional and deeper investigations would be of great interest to improve the stability of the selection in the future. The knowledge management of a collective project is represented as a control loop: the KDMS is the actuator, the risk accompanying the decision is the controlled variable and is strongly linked to the entropy of the knowledge base managed by the KDMS. Each of the three phases—Intelligence, Design, Choice—of the decision-making process is identified to a function of the control loop: actuator, process and regulator. This cybernetic framework for decision has its origin in knowledge management activities for a great-scale project—the EtLD project of the French Atomic Commission (CEA) that concerns the management of high-level long-life radioactive waste in France.

[1]  Belur V. Dasarathy,et al.  Elucidative fusion systems - an exposition , 2000, Inf. Fusion.

[2]  Philippe Vincke,et al.  Robust solutions and methods in decision‐aid , 1999 .

[3]  Jean-Luc Koning Un mécanisme de gestion de règles de décision antagonistes pour les systèmes à base de connaissances , 1990 .

[4]  Michel Grabisch,et al.  Application of the Choquet integral in multicriteria decision making , 2000 .

[5]  Michel Grabisch,et al.  K-order Additive Discrete Fuzzy Measures and Their Representation , 1997, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[6]  Ronald R. Yager,et al.  On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multicriteria decisionmaking , 1988, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..

[7]  Lamia Berrah,et al.  Industrial performance improvement: efficacy and efficiency measurement issued from a Choquet integral aggregation , 2005 .

[8]  E. Paschetta,et al.  A real‐world MCDA application: evaluating software , 2000 .

[9]  J. Kacprzyk Towards “human-consistent” decision support systems through common sense knowledge-based decision making and control models: a fuzzy logic approach , 1987 .

[10]  Jean-Luc Marichal,et al.  Determination of weights of interacting criteria from a reference set , 2000, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[11]  Jacky Montmain,et al.  Elucidation and risk expressions of a movie recommendation based on a multi-criteria aggregation with a Choquet integral , 2004 .

[12]  H. Simon,et al.  Models of Bounded Rationality: Empirically Grounded Economic Reason , 1997 .

[13]  Didier Dubois,et al.  A review of fuzzy set aggregation connectives , 1985, Inf. Sci..

[14]  Donald A. Schön,et al.  Organizational Learning: A Theory Of Action Perspective , 1978 .

[15]  Jacky Montmain,et al.  Information System and Decisional Risk Control for a Cybernetic Modeling of Project Management , 2004 .

[16]  L. Zadeh A COMPUTATIONAL APPROACH TO FUZZY QUANTIFIERS IN NATURAL LANGUAGES , 1983 .

[17]  M. Grabisch The application of fuzzy integrals in multicriteria decision making , 1996 .

[18]  Jacky Montmain,et al.  A project decision support system based on an elucidative fusion system , 2002, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Information Fusion. FUSION 2002. (IEEE Cat.No.02EX5997).

[19]  Salvatore Greco,et al.  Assessing non-additive utility for multicriteria decision aid , 2004, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[20]  Simon French,et al.  Bringing understanding in societal decision making: explaining and communicating analyses? , 2003 .

[21]  H. Simon Bounded Rationality and Organizational Learning , 1991 .

[22]  Michel Grabisch,et al.  Fuzzy aggregation of numerical preferences , 1999 .

[23]  Philippe Vincke,et al.  Robust and neutral methods for aggregating preferences into an outranking relation , 1999, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[24]  Jacky Montmain,et al.  Propagation of uncertainty by the possibility theory in Choquet integral-based decision making: application to an E-commerce website choice support , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement.